To What Extent is Martial Effectiveness Necessary...

Mary Malmros wrote: Emphasis mine. The MMA "professionals", like other elite athletes, have the resources to devote to a full-time training regimen. Would we be better at our aikido if we followed that regimen? Quite possibly, and good luck getting someone to carry your freight while you do so. The rest of us have other responsibilities in our lives that we can't simply abdicate in order to train full-time.

Bah, it doesn't even need to be fulltime. I've watched hour long 'martial arts' classes where the students never even break a sweat.

If I ever invent my own martial art, you will get your first belt after you can jog up a flight of steps without passing out.

Don Magee wrote: Bah, it doesn't even need to be fulltime.

To get the training benefits that a full-time athlete gets from their program? Yes, it does.

Don Magee wrote: I've watched hour long 'martial arts' classes where the students never even break a sweat.

That is a different matter altogether.

Don Magee wrote: If I ever invent my own martial art, you will get your first belt after you can jog up a flight of steps without passing out.

Why don't you go ahead and invent it, then? Call it "running up flights of stairs". It won't be a martial art, but hey, knock yourself out. Give people belts in twenty-seven colors with stripes and a bicycle reflector on them if you want, it's no sillier than a lot of what's out there now.

shugyo

You're absolutely right, and the same holds true for high-level amateur athletes as well. Most of us have real lives to lead and simply can't dedicate that kind of time and effort. I think too, that many of the old-timers of Aikido spent virtually all of their time in the dojo. Some had jobs that called them away for periods of the day as Saito Sensei did, and others had jobs that incorporated Aikido training as Shioda Sensei experienced. I know that my own Aikido would be better if I could spend more time training, was in better condition and I found a way to shed about forty years.

Mary Malmros wrote: To get the training benefits that a full-time athlete gets from their program? Yes, it does. That is a different matter altogether. Why don't you go ahead and invent it, then? Call it "running up flights of stairs". It won't be a martial art, but hey, knock yourself out. Give people belts in twenty-seven colors with stripes and a bicycle reflector on them if you want, it's no sillier than a lot of what's out there now.

That's a bunch of bull. Regardless of what anyone wants to think, being in better shape = being better able to defend yourself. You have a defeatist attitude. This is like saying that just because you can't work out 6 times a day you shouldn't try to work out at all because it is futile.

Sure, you can't dedicate the time a pro does, but that doesn't mean their training methods only work if you dedicate the same amount of time. Their training methods work because they are professionals and spend a lot of time finding the most efficient training methods. When every second of training counts you are not going to waste your time doing things that do not effect your performance in a positive way.

Sure, doing it 6 times a day is better then twice a week, but that doesn't mean that twice a week with be just as bad as doing nothing at all. I spent a long time in the martial arts wasting my time. I learned more in 3 months using those brutish training methods then I did in a decade. I learned that cardio combined with stress response training accounted for more then any number of crazy joint locks, weapon disarms, or 40 hit combo attacks every could. I learned that every 1-step TKD movement I practiced was essentially a waste of my time.

Finally, I learned that I didn't have to train like a pro to get good results. I simply had to train in the same manner and except the results come slower.

THAT was the point I was trying to make. I've watched classes spend time perfecting the art of the throat rip when not a single one could even hope to hit even a halfway competent fighter in the face with a simple punch. Then they go home feeling they have learned something valuable and useful without even the need to wash their gi.

Self defense starts with physical fitness. Then it requires motion, timing, and resistance. If you are unwilling or unable to do that, then I will tell you straight up that you are not doing a martial art but simply playing a game of live action role playing. The difference is that you don't see forums of larpers claiming they can stop attackers with magic missle.

All this really depends on focusing on exactly what you want to be good at or effective at.

In Aikido I have run into...in the same class...many people that have many different goals and objectives as the end state.

However, in a good class, taught by a competent instructor, that knows what he is teaching as fair as "AIKI" goes...there is alot of room for many different end states to be practiced and none of them have to be in conflict with each other.

However, if your focus is on all the stuff that is NON AIKI, then that might be an entirely different subject, and I would suggest an quite possibly an entirely different approach to training.

Aikido does not work full time as an end all and be all for my "Martial Training or Effectiveness", however it has it's place and I focus on the things I need to focus on when training in Aikido.

Just like World Class Athletes...they focus on the things they need to focus on and are fairly clear about their objectives. Each one of them may have a different approach or strategy to their overall success, and some might do some really bizzare things that work for them.

However, no world class athelete that I ever met completely turned over all responsibility or trained mindlessly under one coach or "system". It was a progressive path.

They didn't walk up to the discus the first day and expect to be "effective" with it over night, or when first coached by a competent coach, and then they couldn't throw it as far..say that the coaches methods were a waste of time!

However we do this in Budo all the time! Go to a class and one of the senior students can't make us go down and we discredit the teacher...or we can't make the other guy go down.

I think training takes a much more long term and complex view before we make decisions like this!

That said, I also agree with Don Magee. We don't need to train 6 times a day in order to get better or be "Good".

We simply need to make up our mind that in the time we do spend, that we are going to not make excuses and train like a world class athlete and expect the best out of ourselves that we can.

We don't need to make excuses or turn ourselves over to a teacher and NOT take responsibility for our own successes and failures.

I see this happening alot in Martial Arts for some reason.

Graham Jenkins wrote: To What Extent is Martial Effectiveness Necessary... ...to Practice Aikido?

If it is necessary, at what point and against what opponents do you count as practising aikido? Even the weirdest most dishonest of the Ki' stuff will work against a five year old kid. And if you are that five year old kid whatever you learn short of getting a weapon and lurking in ambush isn't going to help you against the twenty year old guy who's grown up doing the ugly and just returned from Iraq. Is it impossible for kids to do Aikido?

Effectiveness is defined by how well a given response fits a situation in order to bring about a desired goal. It's not a constant.

The assumption that you can do badly, that improvement is possible, incorporates the idea that you can do it as long as you retain a core essence beyond simply effectiveness.

Personally I tend to take the outlook that if something doesn't incorporate an understanding of distancing, timing, angles, and structure; or doesn't apply those to deflect attacks, position to retaliate immediately, and disrupt the opponent; then it's still aikido - or whatever other name you tend to mention. It's just ineffective aikido.

But that's because those are my goals. If someone's there because that's the only peer group they can socialise with, or they're looking for spiritual enlightenment or the like then they're free to knock themselves out. I don't think just because they're going after something else that they're necessarily not practising the same general physical patterns, which I take to be the essence of the art.

Jon Holloway wrote: Dan, while I applaud you doing sparring and somewhat "pressure testing" your art, I find it strange that this is considered "putting your ass on the line." You see, in the LEO world that Mickey and I have lived in, "putting your ass on the line" means something totally different. Teaching, training, or sparring with a bunch of guys in white or black pajamas, MMA gear and rash guards, or whatever, who were, heavens forbid, "not always friendly" just fails to rise to the stress level of having people try to kill you. Sure, you are going to get a few "good fighters" who are going to try to take you down a peg or two in the situation you describe. All that pales in comparison, of course, to: having to fight your way through the crowd of gang members who are trying to beat you to death; wondering if and when someone is going to try to collect the price that is on your head that was set there so you would not testify against those pesky criminal types; writing up that operations plan and then running your team through the location to get the guys responsible for multiple murders and worrying more about the guys with you than yourself because how are you going to face the wife and kids of the guy who died while following your plan; walking into that biker bar to stop the fight and make an arrest or two and knowing that your backup is miles and minutes away and that it takes less than a second to pull a trigger; getting shot at; getting attacked with knives; using your martial arts training in so many confrontations while working in housing projects and other places on the job that you do not even come close to remembering them all; getting injured on the job and wondering whether one day you are going to catch one that is not going to let you come back to work at all... Between the two of us, Mickey and I have been in these and in far more situations. I really don't think he is too worried about whether his stuff works. After all, he is still alive. Now, could he (and I for that matter) be better trained and more highly skilled? Of course he and I can. So can everyone else. I'm always up for some cross training in something or other that I think can help in my training or help in my job.

I always "thank" Military and LEO personnel for serving, Jon, So thank you.
Presumptions about eh?
I have heard these "cop tales" a dozen times over. We were just talking about you two and this thread with other "white pajama people" who teach and have trained with cops and military people.
One overriding thought was to consider this as you try to validate your skills based your "blood and guts encounters" in domestics with husbands and housewives with knives, and bar brawls, and drunken ner do wells, gang bangers, and crazy people and how much of a hard time you all keep talking about in dealing with them.

Just imagine very pissed off and experienced MMA guys who are well prepared, and who actually can fight you, coming at you unexpectedly and you having to do your job with no back up and no weapons ......
Boy I bet those would be some real stories!
Having trained with and also trained... spec ops, prison guards, and LEO many times (my brother is a cop as well), and then talking with other teachers who had similar experiences, pardon me if I am unmoved.
Whiel I respect, and also sympathize with their efforts, I never have been much impressed by what a cop could do compared to experienced MMA guys, even wrestler friends. You should also consider you are talking to men here who have had their own lives in their hands, some of us several times over as well, they just don't use it much to validate other training skills.

That said most LEO and military personnel I have met were rarely "truly capable" and several were walking attitude problems to train with. In fact some had egos so fragile that when faced with serious pressure and evaluations of their skills by others, they demonstrated unprofessional behavior and anything but... a prepared mind. I have shared and heard stories of cops who "went off" on people while simply training. Spec ops guys in general were more stable to train with.
Hey, I'm not saying this includes everyone, that's just ridiculous, I have friends and family who are in both branches, who are great people and truly prepared, but they didn't get their fighting skills from being cops, rangers or seals. They went elsewhere, to hone their skills...mostly to the white pajama or organized TMA crowd; you know, the FMA, JMA, or CMA.
Or are you saying they're all no good?
I thought since you are trying so hard to validate you and Micky by your "experiences" as cops, (what ever they might actually be) with us "white pajama people",,,I would give you the opportunity to see yourselves through our own experiences, training with many of you guys.
Personally I think it best to foster a prepared mind and expect the unexpected. I wouldn't categorize someone like you did here. With dealing with a cop, I would expect the unexpected,,,that without weapons and back up they might actually be capable and also not be a walking attitude problem to train with.... and then take it from there. That's just good tactics.
Apparently, and thankfully and increasing number of LEO personnel do not agree with you and are interested in training with the white pajama growd, in MMA, BJJ and even good FMA teachers when you can find one, to add to their becoming more capable and less dependant on weapon use.

A couple of guys I know who have worked with LEO on de-escalation of force pointed to lack of verbal skills and attitude problems on the job. They thought that was still overlooked too many times. Once again there is that recogntion of an "attitude problem" actually causing...instead of prevent, problems. I think increaed exposure to people who can actually fight with skill, instead of just brawling, helps control that fear, and knee jerk (over)reaction to being challenged. Good training can come from surpising sources.
Good luck in your training, and stay safe out there.
Dan

Dan,
I think that you and Jon are talking cross-channel here. You are absolutely correct in your assessment of law enforcement officers and their general level of skill in defensive tactics (or whatever name is the flavor of the month). The vast majority of us receive very little formal training and then little to almost no follow-up training during our careers. Some have chosen to seek out additional training by practicing various martial arts, and regardless of which art, tried to become more effective. I submit that your worst-case scenario of the the angry MMA professional is accurate and the vast majority of us would get our fannies kicked in an unarmed and one-on-one context. Thankfully that is truly a worst-case scenario and we will probably never experience it.

My interpretation of what Jon was saying is that LEOs are tested in a different way than what you are currently practicing and that testing has it's own value. I don't think he was implying that LEOs are great combatants because of the circumstances they face, but rather they are experienced in a very dangerous arena and context.

In our world the only rules that apply are those that we must follow. Our opponent has none and there are no time limits. If we lose, the other guy goes on to threaten the rest of the community and we leave in an ambulance or bag. That is pressure testing and stressful. On the other hand, in the dojo environment there usually are some conventions in effect and if you lose, you go home bruised and go back to the drawing board in order to improve. I see that as pressure testing and stressful too, but of a different sort.

If I read you correctly, I would agree that most cops are poorly trained and skilled in comparison with strong martial artists who have cross-trained in striking, grappling and throwing arts. The exceptions are, well, exceptional. And as I said in my earlier post, the greatest skill we bring to the fray is our attitude. As you mentioned our very attitude can also be our greatest weakness.

Hello Michael
I agree
As I said though "presumptions abound!"
I don't want to name names but there are some guys in TMA here who came from some very rough backgrounds who have had, as Jon put it..."their asses on the line," and their lives in their own hands, have been in the SH#@t in some ugly places and didn't know if they were making it home, who also have the scars to prove it. They know the difference very well. They entered TMA for certain reasons of their own. There are excellent points on both sides of the discussions.

Where I disagree with your comment about Jon and my discussion is that, I ....was the only one who introduced a semblance of balance to the discussion.

As I said , the teachers I talked with shared a view, that often it is the cops
that have a tendency to go off or be difficult in training unlike what they see with Military personnel. I have seen it with my own brother and friends of mine. I understand the mindset, but I'll be damned if I am ever going to think the better of it or make it a laudable quality. I had two friends; one was kind of a jerk going in to the force, the other was a great guy...both ended up as "Cops with an attitude." The good guy quit,.the jerk was right at home till he got canned. We all saw it coming. I think it's a weakness that seems to get developed on the job..
Mind you, I also know several guys who retired on the job and were super people.
Anyway, I read once again that all too familiar
"I am tough because I'm a cop...."
And
"You wouldn't understand."
This time coupled with his sarcasm of the "white pajama crowd".
I have no patience for non-sense. Particularly considering I knew and trained with so many mentally healthy and good cops who came to that same "white pajama crowd" Jon was dismissing and got their asses kicked, hand-to-hand and with weapons.
I like more seasoned, viable and balanced discussions, with full respect for what those guys have to deal with and things they know and have to do and with full respect for what some of us can deliver.
We should elevate the discussion or not have it at all.
Cheers and thanks for looking out for us out there
Dan

Dan,

Sorry about the following thread drift......I take your point about "good cop/bad cop". I've known them both. There are those who get through the screening somehow and should never have been hired. Most are pretty good people, but most of us tend to gravitate to a "tough guy" facade in innocuous ways. We are taught to take charge of any situation and to convey to those around us that we are confident and competent to resolve it. In short order, that seems to translate into a tough guy demeanor. Eventually we learn the difference and drop the tough guy crap and life gets measurably better for everyone.

What I have also seen with LEOs trying out their white pajamas is that they aren't willing to put in the work required to develop any real competence in the art they've chosen. I've seen it in the Aikido dojo and my son sees it frequently in his BJJ school - he's a cop on the border as well. Those who stick with the MAs tend to do a better job in my opinion and usually end up using less force than those with only traditional police training. I have no statistical data to support that, but rather that is my observation.

My original interest in Aikido came from my DT instructor in the academy. He was yudansha in Aikido, Judo and Karate and introduced us to some rudimentary Aikido. I decided then and there I would train in Aikido because I wanted something more than the Marines or the academy taught me.

Hi Michael
Again, I agree. I will leave it up to you guys to be the more seasoned and informed in those areas. I am only talking from experience dealing with you guys on the training end. From what I read, and others in the know, they seem to agree with my earlier comments that the more confident you make someone in physical skills, and with trained verbal de escalation skills, the less likely and or less need they may find in resorting to force.
I find it interesting that the military found uses for force on force in hand to hand, that while not directly related, brought about many positive results in other areas. Perhaps it is a constant for anyone who has to deal with pressure and the difficult decision making process of reading the situation, considering options of when, and when not to, engage.
Cheers
Dan

Dan Harden wrote: I always "thank" Military and LEO personnel for serving, Jon, So thank you. Presumptions about eh? I have heard these "cop tales" a dozen times over. We were just talking about you two and this thread with other "white pajama people" who teach and have trained with cops and military people. One overriding thought was to consider this as you try to validate your skills based your "blood and guts encounters" in domestics with husbands and housewives with knives, and bar brawls, and drunken ner do wells, gang bangers, and crazy people and how much of a hard time you all keep talking about in dealing with them. Just imagine very pissed off and experienced MMA guys who are well prepared, and who actually can fight you, coming at you unexpectedly and you having to do your job with no back up and no weapons ...... Boy I bet those would be some real stories! Having trained with and also trained... spec ops, prison guards, and LEO many times (my brother is a cop as well), and then talking with other teachers who had similar experiences, pardon me if I am unmoved. Whiel I respect, and also sympathize with their efforts, I never have been much impressed by what a cop could do compared to experienced MMA guys, even wrestler friends. You should also consider you are talking to men here who have had their own lives in their hands, some of us several times over as well, they just don't use it much to validate other training skills. That said most LEO and military personnel I have met were rarely "truly capable" and several were walking attitude problems to train with. In fact some had egos so fragile that when faced with serious pressure and evaluations of their skills by others, they demonstrated unprofessional behavior and anything but... a prepared mind. I have shared and heard stories of cops who "went off" on people while simply training. Spec ops guys in general were more stable to train with. Hey, I'm not saying this includes everyone, that's just ridiculous, I have friends and family who are in both branches, who are great people and truly prepared, but they didn't get their fighting skills from being cops, rangers or seals. They went elsewhere, to hone their skills...mostly to the white pajama or organized TMA crowd; you know, the FMA, JMA, or CMA. Or are you saying they're all no good? I thought since you are trying so hard to validate you and Micky by your "experiences" as cops, (what ever they might actually be) with us "white pajama people",,,I would give you the opportunity to see yourselves through our own experiences, training with many of you guys. Personally I think it best to foster a prepared mind and expect the unexpected. I wouldn't categorize someone like you did here. With dealing with a cop, I would expect the unexpected,,,that without weapons and back up they might actually be capable and also not be a walking attitude problem to train with.... and then take it from there. That's just good tactics. Apparently, and thankfully and increasing number of LEO personnel do not agree with you and are interested in training with the white pajama growd, in MMA, BJJ and even good FMA teachers when you can find one, to add to their becoming more capable and less dependant on weapon use. A couple of guys I know who have worked with LEO on de-escalation of force pointed to lack of verbal skills and attitude problems on the job. They thought that was still overlooked too many times. Once again there is that recogntion of an "attitude problem" actually causing...instead of prevent, problems. I think increaed exposure to people who can actually fight with skill, instead of just brawling, helps control that fear, and knee jerk (over)reaction to being challenged. Good training can come from surpising sources. Good luck in your training, and stay safe out there. Dan

I owe Mickey ten bucks. We were grilling steaks yesterday and he predicted your response to the letter.

Dan, first of all, I am not seeking validation for anything, and am not here to get accolades. I have quite enough awards and recognition already. I will probably not even post here much, other than discussing what happens in a real fight and the use of weapons, if and when such threads occur. I will also respond to questions, if asked and if I have the time.

I do find it amusing that you make assumptions, especially when you get so upset when you say other people make assumptions about you. You see, I have fought and arrested martial arts trained people before, and done it without utilizing a weapon. My "blood and guts encounters" have often been against professional "enforcer" types, rather than "domestic disputes" (though those can be very dangerous as well). I do cross train in other arts. I have 30 years of training in martial arts, have an instructor rank or two, and am the head of a Filipino Kali system today.

I never said that people should not train in traditional arts, or MMA. I did say that such training is not "putting your ass on the line" as you had stated it was, and I stand by that statement. If there is no real possibility that someone is going to try to seriously injure or kill you, your ass is not on the line.

I find your propensity to pick little pieces of a post out and try to bludgeon people with them, and then to dance around any direct questions asked you, very amusing. To each his own, however, and if that makes you happy, please continue. I will say that the absolute best instructors that I have ever trained with (and I've trained with quite a few people) had real world experience in dealing with violent attacks and had years of training time in martial arts. I have seen many people who looked great in the training hall fall apart when the fight was for real. However, I have also seen people respond as they were trained and do very well when they were attacked. The bottom line is, until you have been in a real fight, you can postulate, bluster, and theorize, but you will never know how you will do. Training is the best substitute you can get for having been in the real deal and the best skill set builder, but, no matter how well trained someone is, no soldiers and cops who I have worked with (and I've worked and trained with quite a few) consider a person "solid" until they have seem them in action and know that they will not crumble when blood starts to flow.

MMA, as practiced today, is, of course, not the "end all, be all" system of fighting, as nothing will ever be "the best" methodology for every situation or every person. MMA as a concept is great. Mixing ideas and cross training with other people is a great way to learn. Using an MMA professional as a benchmark to shoot for in physical conditioning is good as well, since many of the pros are phenomenal athletes and in extraordinary physical condition. I train for stamina and strength in addition to martial arts training and firearms training for skill building and maintenance, and encourage my students to do the same. I like to cross train and I will try to arrange some time to work out with a couple members on this board, if possible. Mickey runs an "open school," and we are more than happy for people to give us a call and drop in to exchange ideas. We have a seminar in November in which we will sponsor a high ranking European instructor of Lightning Scientic Arnis. Most of my students and I will be there training and are looking forward to seeing and feeling the powerful striking methodologies of Lightning. After seeing some of the information posted here by Mike Sigman, I am thinking that some of his training might plug into some of the Silat and Kun Tao methodologies I utilize. I could care less if my students wish to cross train, and I encourage them to do so. I do take issue, however, with people who do not study the kali system which I head and who claim to do so, people who trained inconsistently and half-heartedly and for very short periods of time who then discuss our methodologies as if they know what they are talking about, and any others whose actions may damage the reputation of Albo Kali Silat. You see, Albo is the family name of the clan that created this system, and was the last name of the man who was the first man to train non-Filipinos in this system, the man who designated me as the senior instructor in the art after himself, and the man who died and left me in charge of the system. I told him I would look after his name and his system if anything should happen to him, and I fully intend to do so.

Quite frankly, Dan, Mickey asked you to come by and train, but, after reading more on this board, I am no longer interested. Many say you are a great guy in person, but your online persona sure needs some work. Maybe you have suffered the "slings and arrows" of other people here enough that you now automatically come out swinging. However, I trained for years with a very highly talented martial artist who was very difficult to get along with, and I trained with him because of the vast knowledge that he had. I would not do it again. To be honest, at this point in my life, I have a low BS quotient, little interest in Internet forum squabbles, and no time to waste on personality issues and "my Dragon Style is better than your Tiger Style."

I am glad I saw your post when I accessed the ‘Net at lunch, so I could jot this quick response. I will be on the road tomorrow, and out of state for awhile. I will not be posting another response to you, Dan, as it seems to be a waste of your time and mine. I will continue to post on this forum when I can and when I see a discussion to which I might contribute something that seems useful.

Train hard, train well, and good luck with your students. I sincerely hope that they get what they are seeking from their training and they all have a good time while doing it.

Don Magee wrote: Finally, I learned that I didn't have to train like a pro to get good results. I simply had to train in the same manner and accept the results come slower. THAT was the point I was trying to make. I've watched classes spend time perfecting the art of the throat rip when not a single one could even hope to hit even a halfway competent fighter in the face with a simple punch. Then they go home feeling they have learned something valuable and useful without even the need to wash their gi. Self defense starts with physical fitness. Then it requires motion, timing, and resistance. If you are unwilling or unable to do that, then I will tell you straight up that you are not doing a martial art but simply playing a game of live action role playing. The difference is that you don't see forums of larpers claiming they can stop attackers with magic missile.

Spot On...Because Aikido is "not fighting" In my experience extra attention must be paid to practicing hard Otherwise one can find oneself sucked down the hole of incompetence with the rest of the Aikibunnies. And the time to find out you've fallen down that Rabbit Hole is not when you actually have to use your practice in a serious confrontation.

This by the way is true of any Martial Practice.

Like it or not... Aikido is Budo... which means practice is all about the "issue" of Life and Death.

Well Jon my responses were pretty clear, and to the point, yours are all over the place. I'm not sure you can make a point and follow the flow of the discussion without resorting to all this chatter about "your arts" and still more chest beating stories about you being a cop, and now other unrelated side issues.
I never questioned whether or not you could handle yourself Jon. That is a side issue that has nothing to do with the topic. You are the one who walked in and did that to me and to others here. I replied, and in so doing tried to expand the discussion out of personal areas into a more worthwhile and broader scope that others could speak to. As others just did. That forwards the discussion, Jon.
Your replies have been disjointed, highly personal and largely off topic. Jun doesn't like personal issues clouding discussions although he obviously can't catch them all. If you can't control yourself, perhaps you shouldn't reply after all.
Dan

I see now I should have included in my original smilie string the : smilies

I have this odd feeling about what might happen to this thread.

I think the extent to which "effectiveness" is necessary depends entirely upon the goals of the student. I chose to study Aikido, in part for some lessons on practical self-defense, but the bulk of my choice was centered around a very basic attempt at shugyo. To illustrate this point: I didn't think much of what I first saw looked very practical, but I liked the heavy emphasis on meditative qualities so I eventually joined up and began training. Later, I discovered that the cooperative stuff has a purpose. To my mind, any time someone is "just being practical" they're usually compromising something long-term to make short-term gains. On the mat, to me this means sometimes acting in ways that seem less practical for the sake of trying to learn something more subtle. I'm not saying this directly applies to your situation, just that this is what comes to mind based on my own experiences...which are admittedly slight.

Matthew Gano wrote: I think the extent to which "effectiveness" is necessary depends entirely upon the goals of the student. I chose to study Aikido in part for some lessons on practical self-defense, but the bulk of my choice was centered around a very basic attempt at shugyo. To illustrate this point: I didn't think much of what I first saw looked very practical, but I liked the heavy emphasis on meditative qualities so I eventually joined up and began training. Later, I discovered that the cooperative stuff has a purpose. To my mind, any time someone is "just being practical" they're usually compromising something long-term to make short-term gains. On the mat, to me this means sometimes acting in ways that seem less practical for the sake of trying to learn something more subtle. I'm not saying this directly applies to your situation, just that this is what comes to mind based on my own experiences...which are admittedly slight.

I guess what I meant by 'martial effectiveness' was the ability to actually harmonise with someone - to 'make their strength your own': if an uke merely pretends that this has happened, then you are not doing aikido - there is no harmony with another's energy, and you are not connected to someone; so you're left wasting your time pretending.

I really resent ukes who I know are really letting me get away with not doing aikido, by responding as though I am (i.e.,they act as though i've taken their balance when I haven't); i've found it to be counter-productive, as what might start out as a necessary training method has ultimately become a bad, harmful habit, and I find it very frustrating.
I don't want to be allowed to get away with stuff - I want to be told that something isn't working, and why - only then can I improve it!
My time (not to mention money) is valuable to me, so i'd rather not spend all the time travelling (I spend as much time travelling to training as I do training), just to have somebody piss down my back and tell me it's raining - if you'll excuse the metaphor - meaning that in a year's time, i'll be pretty much where I am right now.

I hope that makes sense.

Graham Jenkins wrote: I guess what I meant by 'martial effectiveness' was the ability to actually harmonise with someone - to 'make their strength your own': if an uke merely pretends that this has happened, then you are not doing aikido - there is no harmony with another's energy, and you are not connected to someone; so you're left wasting your time pretending. I really resent ukes who I know are really letting me get away with not doing aikido, by responding as though I am (i.e.,they act as though i've taken their balance when I haven't); i've found it to be counter-productive, as what might start out as a necessary training method has ultimately become a bad, harmful habit, and I find it very frustrating. I don't want to be allowed to get away with stuff - I want to be told that something isn't working, and why - only then can I improve it! My time (not to mention money) is valuable to me, so i'd rather not spend all the time travelling (I spend as much time travelling to training as I do training), just to have somebody piss down my back and tell me it's raining - if you'll excuse the metaphor - meaning that in a year's time, i'll be pretty much where I am right now. I hope that makes sense.

I'm of a similar mind...I always like it when uke provides a challenge and shows me where my openings are forming. I think some of the more ki-based stuff transcends the idea of who is dominating though. What might be considered more important in those schools could be the idea of exploring the connection itself, not so much what you're doing with it (sensitivity training). In other words, as uke I might not do everything I can to resist a technique (i.e. i practically give away my balance), in an effort to focus more on whole-body interaction. I remember training with some very very soft and overly-yielding folks and I always felt like I had to try very hard to just to have the sense of connection to their center...though when I was able to, it seemed to be a good exercise in its own right...and which reminds me of something: The Rule of 10 (?): "if they give 7, you give 3; if they only give 1 you have to give 9."
In those cases you experienced, did you ask uke to make it tougher? This usually worked pretty well for me. When I was the uke I pretty much did whatever nage wanted, but I always looked to encroach upon that threshold where the role of uke and nage meet. In that case I believe nage could still get something out of it, even if it wasn't much. If I knew my partner well, I would be far more likely to disrupt the movement where I thought I sensed an opening though...

I can see how if you're training at a variety of places that aren't familiar with you, they might be focusing more on form than function. I remember training after some time off and "taking it easy" on a guy who turned out to be a very good judoka. After he told me he was in line to go to the olympics for judo (at some point in time) I tried as hard as I knew how.

Graham Jenkins wrote: I really resent ukes who I know are really letting me get away with not doing aikido, by responding as though I am (i.e.,they act as though i've taken their balance when I haven't)

I think most agree but ... are you sure that the uke is doing that? I used to think so until I had a detailed conversation with a few and found they all had their reasons that were good reasons and had nothing to do with 'tanking' explicitly. Most were protecting injuries or preventing reinjury.

I try to make it clear what I expect from juniors and if they have a good reason (I directly ask and try to make it clear that it is OK) to do otherwise then I'm good with that.

My presumptions should not be dumped on others.

Robert M Watson Jr wrote: I think most agree but ... are you sure that the uke is doing that? I used to think so until I had a detailed conversation with a few and found they all had their reasons that were good reasons and had nothing to do with 'tanking' explicitly. Most were protecting injuries or preventing reinjury.

Good point!

Graham Jenkins wrote: View Post I really resent ukes who I know are really letting me get away with not doing aikido, by responding as though I am (i.e.,they act as though i've taken their balance when I haven't)

Although I rarely give away a technique it happens sometimes that I'm lighter than the person I am training with wants, or on a rare occasion I get so eager to fly I forget to let the poor person actually do what they are supposed to do. If I've really blown it and jumped for no reason I usually apologize for my slip because to me that is an error in my ukemi which I am always striving to improve just as much as my technique. If they seem not to be happy I ask them if they would like a different attack stronger lighter more agressive or whatnot. If I don't know the person I'll start out pretty light because I have no idea what level of intensity they are used to or like and, from what I hear, when I ramp up and get intense it can be kinda intimidating so I tend to only play like that with those that I know.

So perhaps what is needed is for you to communicate to your training partners what kind of attack you want to work against.

Matthew Gano wrote: In other words, as uke I might not do everything I can to resist a technique (i.e. i practically give away my balance), in an effort to focus more on whole-body interaction. [...] In those cases you experienced, did you ask uke to make it tougher? This usually worked pretty well for me

I know what you're saying; but what i'm talking about is when there is no 'whole-body interaction', and in lieu of it, uke is pretending it's there, and pseudo-receiving your technique.
If that happens every time, then i'm never going to change and actually learn the correct technique/way to harmonise with someone; hence such a method of practice is not aikido (although as I previously stated: I think for beginners it's a necessity).
That's what my original post was getting at, anyway.

Matthew, Rob, Cherie:

This is the thing: asking a training partner to change something...I find it's an awkward situation to be in - especially when the other person is a dan grade, and i'm only 5th kyu: I don't want to come across as being a dick - especially when i'm pointing out that they're doing something wrong (Note: this is not referring to the present issue under discussion - it's other things).
The particular training partner I refer to: I know that he's letting me off easy, and I know why - he isn't injured; it's more like he thinks this is the way to treat me in order for me to improve - which did not, has not, and will not, happen.

Graham Jenkins wrote: especially when i'm pointing out that they're doing something wrong

5th kyu always knows better than dan grades. Better a dick than a putz - say something (just try not to think in terms or right/wrong but more along the lines of what you are trying to accomplish).